SEBI v. Indian Infotech & Software Ltd and Varsha Murarka (misstated financials, 2022)

Judgment entered

✓ Checked against the primary document on October 8, 2026. The library's summary, tags and figures for this record were compared with the regulator's own document by an AI model (Claude) following written instructions, in a single reading of the order; an independent second reading of 60 SEBI records agreed on every field for 56, the four misses being penalty amounts; a later sample of 50 of the SEBI records added on 9 October agreed on every field for 46. No lawyer has reviewed them. A checked record can still contain errors, and checked does not mean endorsed. See how we check records or report a correction.

Report an error in this record (sebi-63536-misleading-issuer-disclosure-2022) by email

On 30 September 2022 a SEBI adjudicating officer penalised Indian Infotech & Software Ltd and its director Varsha Murarka Rs 20 lakh in total. The order finds the company's published financial statements were not backed by evidence and that it obstructed a forensic audit.

The record

What was ordered

Civil penalty

—

Disgorgement

—

Prejudgment interest

—

Total relief

—

Alleged gain

—

Penalty as published

2m INR

A dash means the release did not state a figure we could extract, not that the figure is zero. Penalty and disgorgement are stored separately so aggregates across the library do not double-count the same dollars. This regulator states penalties in INR. The figure is recorded as published and is not converted, so it does not appear in the USD totals or medians used elsewhere on this site.

What is alleged to have happened

The respondents are Indian Infotech & Software Ltd, a listed non-bank lender, and Varsha Murarka, one of its directors. The company appeared on a Ministry of Corporate Affairs list of 331 suspected shell companies sent to SEBI, which led SEBI to direct the exchanges in 2017 to commission a forensic audit.

SEBI alleged that the company did not give the forensic auditor or BSE the documents and explanations they asked for, and that a site inspection and the company's annual reports for 2014-15 and 2015-16 showed financial statements that could not be supported. The central doubt was a large loans-and-advances balance the company reported, for which it produced no loan agreements, borrower details, interest records or similar evidence. Ms Murarka was alleged to have known of the misstatements.

The officer found for SEBI on these points. The order holds that the company and Ms Murarka breached section 12A of the SEBI Act and the fraud-prevention rules in the PFUTP Regulations by presenting unsubstantiated figures, and that the company breached listing and disclosure obligations and its duty to cooperate with the audit.

The penalties were, for the company, Rs 2 lakh, Rs 5 lakh, Rs 1 lakh and Rs 5 lakh under four provisions, and for Ms Murarka Rs 5 lakh, Rs 1 lakh and Rs 1 lakh. Together they come to Rs 20 lakh, of which the company's Rs 5 lakh under section 23E of the securities contracts law is enforceable only after a pending Supreme Court appeal in another case is decided. The order also notes an earlier SEBI directive restraining the company and Ms Murarka from the market for limited periods.

The record does not show whether the order was appealed, what the true state of the loan book was, or any loss to shareholders.

This library tags the matter as misleading issuer disclosure. The tagging is ours, not the regulator's.

For the regulator's own account of the facts, read the primary document linked above. This page deliberately summarises the structured record rather than reproducing the order.

What technique is this, and how does it work?

This action is tagged with one technique in our taxonomy. The tagging is ours: regulators charge statutory provisions, not technique names, so the mapping is an editorial judgement described in our editorial policy.

• Misleading issuer disclosure — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.

Timeline

1. 2022-09-30 SEBI order

Primary documents

Everything on this page derives from the documents below. Where our summary and the primary document disagree, the primary document is right.

• SEBI order

The linked release is published by the issuing regulator under its own terms. Our summary and narrative above are our own writing.

Related actions

Other actions in the library sharing at least one technique tag with this one.

Record added October 8, 2026. submit a correction.